2021 Morgan Dollar and Peace Dollar coins - placement in the NGC Registry?
5 5

38 posts in this topic

  • Administrator

The senior team is carefully considering placement of these 2021 coins. Do you think they are appropriate in the US Type Sets, Date Sets, or are strictly commemorative? We value your feedback; please give your 2 cents below. 

Arrow GIF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These are not in any way intended to circulate so I wouldn't want them in a type set for circulating coins. They're NCLT. Only include them if you intend to add silver eagles and other NCLT to the type set (please don't).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/5/2021 at 6:40 AM, BlakeEik said:

I'm just stating facts here.

The new Morgan and Peace dollars:

  • Are silver dollars
  • Are the same width and design as Morgan / Peace type dollars but not the same composition or weight
  • Are not the "same series" as the 1878-1921-1935 series
  • Are not commemoratives (as they are not designated so by congress)

I'm just stating opinion here.

  • The mint has really screwed up traditional series collection with the American Liberty Gold (ALG) Series, the Mayflower series, the First Lady series, etc. These are not commemoratives by congressional act, nor are they considered bullion in the same sense as the ASE, AGE, American Gold Buffalo, etc.  They are different, and should not be lumped in with commemoratives or bullion.  NGC has already started mixing these oddball sets.
  • These "off-the rails" series soured modern coin collecting for me. Some others may enjoy it more, but not me.
  • Having the new Morgan and Peace dollars compete in a registry as types against the traditional dollars would be insane. Period.
  • My vote would be to treat the new Morgan / Peace dollars as something different, or "other," like the series mentioned above. In other words, NGC should have U.S. registry sets in one of the following categories:
    • Traditional only (types that have circulated, including Colonials, tokens, etc. The only exception being pattern coinage, which were very limited and never meant for public consumption.)
    • Commemorative only (Classic 1892-1954, Modern 1982-present, by congressional act only)
    • Bullion only (limited to gold, silver, platinum, and palladium types with a consistent design traded on bullion exchanges. If the new Morgan and Peace dollars are used over multiple years, calling them bullion might make the most sense.  Like Saint Gaudens, they should not be labeled as the "same types" as their design origins).
    • "Other" only (types not in the above categories, e.g. Centennial commemoratives, First Lady, ALG, Mayflower, new Morgan and Peace dollars, Innovation dollars, etc.)
    • And only if necessary, have some sets that combine the 2 or more of the above, but do NOT replace the other sets. Some type sets would certainly fall into this category.

The Mint should really have a name for these "other" coin series they keep making out of thin air. Until they do that, the ANA, NGC, the Red Book, or some organization with some weight should name this odd-ball category. Right now, different organizations are treating them differently - i.e. forcing them into bullion, or commemorative categories.  A real mess!

Couldn't agree more BlakeEik

Edited by Stephen83333
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couldn't agree more BlameEik, these coins have NO business in any NGC registry other than possibly their own small "other" type collection. If NGC places these coins into any of the traditional categories I will lose interest in participation in the future. Please don't do it NGC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had no interest in the 2021 ""CC" or "O" Morgan from the start and no intention of picking one up 2nd hand down the road.  I just don't want a coin with what I refer to as a fake mint mark.  I agree with all the other opinions on here as well.  

If anything, along with the recent uptick in silver this 2021 Morgan hype may have benefited me.  I have an 1885-O Morgan in an NGC holder and while just an MS64 I see the price just spiked in the NGC price guide.   I also have a GSA CC that hasn't been graded yet.  

Spike.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/4/2021 at 7:26 PM, Ali E. said:

The senior team is carefully considering placement of these 2021 coins. Do you think they are appropriate in the US Type Sets, Date Sets, or are strictly commemorative? We value your feedback; please give your 2 cents below. 

Arrow GIF

I'm ok with the P,D and S mints but not the "CC" and "O" Privy.  They are fake mint marks.  The P,D,S are still producing coins today.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/5/2021 at 5:48 AM, Morpheus1967 said:

IMHO, strictly commemorative.  Unlike all the other coins in this series, these were never meant for circulation.  Plus, the "O" mint mark and the "CC" mint mark are privys, not mint marks.  Finally, there are no plans to continue issuing these after this year.  They are what they are.  They commemorate the 100th anniversary of the last Morgan and the first peace dollar.

I personally think they deserve their own short set. 

I totally agree that they deserve their own short set. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ll echo the other votes for a unique short set. Unless the Mint decides to extend this for some unknown and unexpected reason. And, even then, I would just figure they’d be their own thing. Obviously the defunct privy marks aren’t anything more than show. And, quite frankly, until I can go down to the bank and ask for 2021-20?? Silver Dollars, they certainly shouldn’t be part of the circulating set.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

     I'd be ok with allowing one example in the US Type Including moderns next to the original slots.   The Innovation dollars are already allowed into it and I'm pretty sure those are not meant for circulation either.  Same with Sacagaweas.   Allowing one example of the Morgans and the Peace would not be that Earth shattering.   I'd like to see it but if the consensus decides they couldn't sleep at night over it, I wouldn't fight to add them either.   I don't feel that strongly about it either way.  A perfect 70 wouldn't be worth many points.    They should just be called Anniversary issues.  Which they didn't add the 2016s or the 2014 Kennedy half.   So it makes a case for not adding these.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/4/2021 at 7:26 PM, Ali E. said:

The senior team is carefully considering placement of these 2021 coins. Do you think they are appropriate in the US Type Sets, Date Sets, or are strictly commemorative? We value your feedback; please give your 2 cents below. 

Arrow GIF

:signofftopic:but... not a single member, @RWB @VKurtB @Just Bob @MarkFeld @GoldFinger1969 to name a few, are in possession of descending crimson arrows.  I would like to be a big shot, too. Would you be kind enough to share your secret source with me? Thank you for your time and attention.  🐓

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have no place in any legitimate coinage series. Low quality imitations in the wrong alloy and fantasy commemoratives. Slab them if you must, but don't inflict them on set collectors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@RWB:  And to think I paid over $400. for the first two.  Let's see now... I'm thisclose to becoming 70. If Kitco's ever optimistic prognostications are true, I may be able to recoup my investment in fifty years when I'll be 120, right?  (Is that @GoldFinger1969 I hear snickering in the corner?)  Boy, you sure know how to hurt a guy!   🐓

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/29/2021 at 6:48 PM, RWB said:

They have no place in any legitimate coinage series. Low quality imitations in the wrong alloy and fantasy commemoratives. Slab them if you must, but don't inflict them on set collectors.

Sounds like the very same category as the 2016 gold tribute coins. Neither fish nor fowl. Their own category. But if one simply must, only within either bullion series or commemoratives fit. For legal reasons alone, they belong with bullion coins, period. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/27/2021 at 1:53 AM, RJOSTER said:

If the coin is a one year series, okay it’s a commemorative.

Totally agree with the above statement. H.R. 6192 (the 1921 Silver Dollar Coin Anniversary Act), the U.S. Mint, NGC, and numerous numismatic sources all allude to these coins being commemoratives. So unless they become more than just a one year series, then  they ought to be placed somewhere in the "Commemoratives" set  (Modern or Thematic).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a legitimate coin. Not part of the series. Not produced like a real coin - "Privy marks" ? Come on folks -- it's NCLT. And it's not even in the legal alloy for a US silver coin! How greedy can people get?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/26/2021 at 4:53 PM, RJOSTER said:

I’ve read all the comments posted on this topic and no one addressed the fact that the mint ceased production of the Morgan dollar in 1904, then brought it back for one year, 1921.  Only the “purists” would argue that a 100 year gap makes this coin a commemorative.  But then there is the 1921 Morgan. There is no question that the 1921 coin should be included in the series. So I guess a 17 year gap is okay, but not a 100 year gap. Sure you could argue the change in metal composition, then what about the Kennedys, Washington Quarters or Roosevelt dimes? There is no attempt to delineate those series. If the coin is a one year series, okay it’s a commemorative.  The other arguments are the privy mint marks. You could argue that these are “commemorative” Morgans for those mints, but what about the P, D & S Morgans? Again, no one questions the 1921 D Morgan’s (a one year issue!), inclusion in the set.  So my vote is to make it part of the original series!

I guess the difference, to me, between the 1921 (after a 17-year hiatus) and the 2021 (after a 100-year hiatus) is that the 1921 was struck for circulation, and it was circulated (by the tens of millions, even).  It was the same coin as the earlier ones. 

The 2021 is not.  It's a bullion coin masquerading as a commemorative (or something).   And I say that as one who beat his way through the Mint's useless website three times to buy all six coins.

As for the Kennedy half dollars I think it's silly to pretend that the versions struck after they no longer were being circulated are the same coin.  But at least the Kennedy half has been struck continuously since 1964, and the composition changed only because of the price of silver (ditto for the Roosevelt dime and Washington quarter) exceeded the face value of the coin. And anyone who wants one can have for for a nominal sum, without hassle.

It is nothing short of silly, IMO, to pretend that these coins (regardless of how much I expect to like them) are anything but a new series.  Either it will be a one-off, or it will continue.  If it's a one-off (as I dearly hope), then it's really easy; if it becomes a series, then treat it like the other bullion coins, and give them their own series.

Mark

Edited by 124Spider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  The 2016 3 coin 100th anniversary gold coins got their own three coin registry set.  I just put one together the other night.      Why wouldn't NGC do the same with these?   I really wouldn't care if one of these were added to the type sets.   There's already anomalies like the Innovation dollars in there.  It also accepts proof examples that were only made for collectors and not meant for circulation in every category in the US type.    So it doesn't seem like a stretch to count one of these.  But they should at least get their own set given some of the obscure sets that are out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator
On 11/9/2021 at 8:03 PM, Vess1 said:

  The 2016 3 coin 100th anniversary gold coins got their own three coin registry set.  I just put one together the other night.      Why wouldn't NGC do the same with these?   I really wouldn't care if one of these were added to the type sets.   There's already anomalies like the Innovation dollars in there.  It also accepts proof examples that were only made for collectors and not meant for circulation in every category in the US type.    So it doesn't seem like a stretch to count one of these.  But they should at least get their own set given some of the obscure sets that are out there.

Hello, Vess1.

Thanks for your interest. They do have their own set here:

Category: Modern Special Issues
Set Name: Morgan and Peace Dollar 100th Anniversary Set, 2021, Mint State, Complete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/4/2021 at 7:26 PM, Ali E. said:

The senior team is carefully considering placement of these 2021 coins. Do you think they are appropriate in the US Type Sets, Date Sets, or are strictly commemorative? We value your feedback; please give your 2 cents below. 

Arrow GIF

US type sets 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/4/2021 at 4:26 PM, Ali E. said:

The senior team is carefully considering placement of these 2021 coins. Do you think they are appropriate in the US Type Sets, Date Sets, or are strictly commemorative? We value your feedback; please give your 2 cents below. 

Arrow GIF

Do you at least have it set up someplace so that I can enter my coins into my registry?   If you do do you have it someplace where I can find it?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
5 5